Magic Leap Finally Unveils a Mixed Reality Headset

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

REPLY TO THREAD
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  12 December 2017
Originally Posted by masterofacid:  
I have never said that it is DAY1, but with his reasoning, he wanted to have a prefect product (like a holodeck, brain interface thing) ON day1 without any development or improvement over time. With that reasoning you can as well say that we should have had internet in the stone age. Its like saying: "what was the point of all these stone tools that they were making, why didn´t they just go for a cloud service instead?"!...

Some reactions to the iPhone 10 years ago:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...e-10-years-ago/
You were the one who mentioned from "Day one" not me.
Now you make the classic mistake  of exaggerating/distorting
what you beleive to be my "reasoning" to ridiculous extremes 
and then criticizing those extremes.

The continued Failure of Companies to make VR a viable 
&profitable medium for the mainstream, appears to be a very emotional
issue, for its online advocates, as many seem to be taking its utter failure
 quite personally.

I am a bit of a  tech junkie even as my 54th birhtday approaches in two days.
I own two PC's, a macbook ,two Smart phones and 7 inch tablet.
I am all for new technology for productivity as well as entertainment.

I Dont own an actual TV as the cable companies
May as well be selling horse buggy whips
as far as I am concerned .

Of course we wont see "Star trek" Holodeck technology in the short term.
However the VR aspirants have had over 20 years to create something at a form
 factor,a price and with content that will get avergage consumers excited.
So far thay have hurled various ridiculouse ,expensive closed system mud at the wall
hoping that some will finally stick...
and they have failed spectacularly.

That said , VR is wider use in professional training environments
such as Military & Medical.

However as a purely entertainment medium trying to compete
with  existing platforms VR ,in it current iterations, has a difficult task ahead.
 
  12 December 2017
Originally Posted by ThreeDDude: I think VR will never be more than a niche market curiosity
until we get the full star trek holodeck experience.

+

No amount of wishful enthusiam
and money tossing at rubbish like this
Magic leap  product, will make VR
become widely embraced by modern consumers.
Humanity seems perfectly satisfied with experiencing
"other worlds"  Via 2D screens( (Games & Smart Phones)
 until we get something akin  to the Holodeck in Star Trek.

Here is where it is obvious that you will only accept a perfect product DAY1 or no intermediates product at all. Don´t blame me for your impossible* reasoning.

*Impossible unless you believe in technological creationism...
 
  12 December 2017
Originally Posted by ThreeDDude: Of course we wont see "Star trek" Holodeck technology in the short term.
However the VR aspirants have had over 20 years to create something at a form
 factor,a price and with content that will get avergage consumers excited.
So far thay have hurled various ridiculouse ,expensive closed system mud at the wall
hoping that some will finally stick...
and they have failed spectacularly.


Blame the LCD panel manufacturers. If there has been such a thing as a small, 720HD, 60 Hz, affordable LCD panel back in the days, there would have lots of small companies making VR headsets immediately. You would have seen American, British, German, Korean, Japanese companies throwing VR headsets out there.

The resulting VR would not have looked "realistic" but rather "abstract and low poly" as GPUs weren't very good then - think Playstation 1 or 2 quality graphics. But the VR headset side would have been doable, and all sorts of cool VR games could indeed have been developed - games like DOOM and QUAKE and others might have been VR games instead of 2D screen games.

LCD manufacturers didn't get their shit together until smartphones, tablets and netbooks needed small HD panels in quantities of first tens and then hundreds of millions.

So if you wanted to make a "super advanced VR headset" back in 2005 or so, you would have first needed to invest hundreds of millions of R&D and manufacturing dollars into a new kind of LCD panel manufacturing plant capable of making the small HD panels required.

The per-unit cost of the resulting headsets would have been very high - inaffordable to the average gamer - unless it was guaranteed that you can sell in quantities of 10 - 20 million units or more a year.

The problem was never making the plastic headset casing, or the lenses in it, or the head tracking, the data cable and stuff like that. All of that was technically doable.

The LCD panels needed weren't there. That basically left you with the option of sticking a small Cathode Ray Tube onto a headset. That's heavy, bulky, low-resolution - you might get 800 x 600 pixels max on a very high end unit.

If some science genius had managed to make a smartphone sized HD LCD panel back in the early 2000s, we would have been in VR land for over a decade now.

One thing I agree with you on is the incredibly annoying software incompatibility of the headsets being pushed currently.

There is no reason why you couldn't create an "OpenVR Specification V 1.0" from day 1, so that 4 - 5 different headsets from different manufacturers can be used to play any OpenVR game that meets that spec.

As for current VR headset sales - I think that a solid 80% to 90% of interested people are waiting for better and cheaper 2nd or 3rd Gen VR headsets to come along. I am one of those people.

The people who bought current Headsets are just like people who bought early LCD and Plasma TVs displays with the new 16:9 aspect ratio. They were very expensive. You saw them in rich people's homes mostly. Most people stayed on existing CRT TVs for several more years.

When the cost came down and High Definition became a "thing" and movie content started to go widescreen, Plasma and LCD TVs started appearing in more and more people's living rooms.

This is the early days of 21st Century VR. The early headsets are "so so". They cost too much. There isn't a huge amount of good content yet. The ergonomics are "meh".

It is the 2nd and 3rd wave VR headsets - hopefully better and cheaper than today - where we will see whether VR headsets become a mass market trend.

As for the incompatibility of the headsets - each headset requiring stuff to be developed specifically for it - that is a bad enough thing to burn all manufacturers

That's something that needs to be sorted out in my opinion.
 
  12 December 2017
I'm a bit surprised to see this resistance to VR/AR/MR in this forum, of all places. You folks who are criticizing it, have you tried Oculus and Hololens? I'm in the camp of those feeling that this is all very exciting tech, and I see incredible potential for all of it. I see VR (ex: Oculus) as more entertainment oriented for completely manufactured experiences, like Sci-Fi, "visiting" distant locations, and other difficult to achieve otherwise experiences. AR/MR (ex: Hololens) is a bit more of a question mark at the moment to me, but the technology is very impressive. I think that it will be more useful for non-entertainment uses, but who knows where software developers will take it.
 
  12 December 2017
@ThreeDDude
Have you try an HTC Vive and the Lab Experience from Valve Software ?
__________________
emfx.fr
 
  12 December 2017
Originally Posted by ThreeDDude:
That said , VR is wider use in professional training environments
such as Military & Medical.


You left out Architecture
 
  12 December 2017
Originally Posted by Shenan: I'm a bit surprised to see this resistance to VR/AR/MR in this forum, of all places. You folks who are criticizing it, have you tried Oculus and Hololens? I'm in the camp of those feeling that this is all very exciting tech, and I see incredible potential for all of it. I see VR (ex: Oculus) as more entertainment oriented for completely manufactured experiences, like Sci-Fi, "visiting" distant locations, and other difficult to achieve otherwise experiences. AR/MR (ex: Hololens) is a bit more of a question mark at the moment to me, but the technology is very impressive. I think that it will be more useful for non-entertainment uses, but who knows where software developers will take it.


Ten years from now AR glasses may be as lightweight as prescription glasses (e.g. 40 - 80 grams for the whole unit) or even integrated into contact lenses.

Advantage? You won't need smartphones or tablets for anything significant anymore.

You know recent games where there is an on-screen marker or arrow showing you where you need to go next? The next objective, the next mission?

With AR, you'll have that in a real city. Where is the building where my 3pm appointment is? Arrow. Where is the nearest ATM machine? Arrow. Where is the subway station entrance? Arrow.

Or you are operating a machine you are completely unfamiliar with. Which button do I press to do X? The button you need to press begins to glow. You just press it.

Its going to be exactly like games where you have a HUD assisting you. Just in real life, in real physical spaces and locations.

Emails and text messages will appear in front of you. You'll be able to sit on a bus or train on the way to work or school and watch a film on a virtual screen floating in front of you.

The only strange thing is going to be that you'll see a lot of people looking at various virtual things in the real world that nobody else can see all the time.

A person interacting with AR things floating in front of him or her with his or her hands in the air will look a bit odd at first, because only that person can see these things.

Kind of like when hands-free kits for cellphones first came out. You'd see people talking to themselves in the middle of a street, and think "Is this person talking to somebody who isn't really there?" Of course they were really talking into a hands-free kit microphone.

AR is going to be huge in education. Kids will be able to look at a Ford or Toyota or Tesla parked by the curb, and through AR glasses see how the engine or gearbox under the hood works.

You'll be able to walk into a shop that sells laptops, and see right into the casing of the laptop that interests you. You'll see the motherboard, CPU, GPU, RAM chips, SSD, LCD panel and all sorts of connecting wires and cables. You'll be able to examine the build quality. No more buying a computer without having any clue as to what its insides look like.

Same goes for just about any other product. Washing machines, dish washers, vacuum cleaners. The shop assistant may use AR to let you look inside a kitchen appliance and demonstrate what goes on inside it when it is operating.

You may one day be able to look at your own hand through AR glasses, and see how the bones, muscles, tendons under your skin work when you use your hand. You may be able to look inside your own body in other words. At the organs inside your abdomen for example. See your lungs inflate and deflate. See you heart pump blood. Very cool stuff.

AR has many positive real world applications. The tech just needs to get better, cheaper and more usable.

If AR were commonplace today, you might be sitting in a park under a tree right now and see this forum floating in the air in front of you.

The killer app for AR, in my opinion, will be useful information overlaid onto the real world. If you walk into a park, you may see a tree and know nothing about it. Your AR glasses may put floating text next to it that says its a Red Maple planted there back in August 5th 2003 that is currently 17 feet 2 inches tall.

The biggest problem with AR will be the same as the Internet - having to endure forced advertising everywhere you go.

You'll be walking past some shops and - pop - a colorful soap bubble advertising a 30% Off Sale on batch and kitchen supplies at a shop 10 steps away will pop up, beckoning you to go inside and shop.

We'll need AR Ad-Blocker extensions at that point.
 
  01 January 2018
I have been an AR and VR enthusiast for a few decades now, and It seems that older CG guys are the most resistant to the new AR/VR tech, even as it emerges as a clearly superior way of experiencing and working in 3D. The best I can do to explain this is to say that people are threatened by change, particularly when they have years invested in older ways of doing things. 

One thing is certain, 2D display devices, input devices, and the 3D applications that use them are going to become the history of how 3D CG was 1st produced.
 
reply share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.